On Friday, the High Court of New Zealand ruled (PDF) that Kim Dotcom should gain access to the data seized by local police during a January 2012 raid. The decision represents yet another intermediate victory for the Megaupload founder, who is accused of copyright infringement-related crimes in the United States.

The High Court judge used some fairly strong language to describe the way in which the search and arrest warrants were issued (and how the subsequent SWAT-style raid on Kim Dotcom’s mansion was handled). “This has given rise to a miscarriage of justice,” Chief Justice Helen Winkelmann wrote in her decision.

Earlier this month, we reported on how the New Zealand Supreme Court is expected to hear an appeal to determine whether Dotcom should have access to the American evidence (in the form of documents, rather than seized data) against him. (And that’s even before local judges will determine whether Dotcom can be extradited to the United States, where he faces charges.) The entire saga has become one of the most expensive legal cases in New Zealand’s history.

Justice Winkelmann quoted from her own previous decision in which she found the warrants invalid, and she has now ruled that “in respect of items containing only relevant material, [clones of the seized data] must be provided to the plaintiffs before a clone is provided to the United States.”

In addition, she ruled, any data seized with irrelevant data should be returned. Meanwhile, “mixed content devices” should also be returned to Kim Dotcom.

Quoting from her previous decision, she wrote:

The warrants do not stipulate that the offences of breach of copyright and money laundering are offences under the law of the United States of America, nor that they are punishable by a sentence of imprisonment of two years or more. They do not refer to any statutory provision to enable the subject of the warrant to understand the nature of the offences referred to. The failure to refer to the laws of the United States on the face of the warrants would no doubt have caused confusion to the subjects of the searches. They would likely read the warrants as authorising a search for evidence of offences as defined by New Zealand's law. The only clue that they are not is that each warrant is headed “The Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1992”. That is not much of a clue.

In the present decision, she concluded:

The arrest warrants stipulated offences that the search warrants were not sought or issued for, namely conspiracy to commit racketeering and conspiracy to commit copyright infringement. More fundamentally, this additional information could not cure the defect that the warrants authorised the seizure of items unlimited by the notion of relevance to each offence. As a consequence, the Police regarded themselves as authorised to carry away and keep a wide category of items without undertaking analysis of whether the items were “things” falling within s 44(1). They continue to assert that they are so authorised. This has given rise to a miscarriage of justice.

Promoted Comments

On the one hand, Kim is one of the internet's biggest douchebags; an egomaniacal spoiled child.

This does not matter in the least.

The measure of the rights Kim Dotcom has, when many people online think he's a scummy, horrible person, is the measure of the rights you have. The only time you need your rights is when you're deeply unpopular with the government, and possibly the people. If you only have rights when you're popular, then you don't have them at all. The freedom to conform is not freedom.

If the US's case fails against him, this is a cause for rejoicing, not sorrow, at least for New Zealand citizens, because it means the rule of law there has not been corrupted by the media giants.

Why is it taking years for this lack of a trial to take place? Judge Judy would have knocked this one out in a half hour.

The fact that trials can take years is ridiculous. They should charge him, or not charge him with a crime, not waste time and money. If Kim really did something wrong, US authorities would not let this drag on.

Why is it taking years for this lack of a trial to take place? Judge Judy would have knocked this one out in a half hour.

The fact that trials can take years is ridiculous. They should charge him, or not charge him with a crime, not waste time and money. If Kim really did something wrong, US authorities would not let this drag on.

It's not really that cut and dried. It's hard to argue that his website and activities did not contribute in some large part to piracy in some form or other, the issue is his extradition and the manner in which he was arrested and his possessions being taken with incorrect warrants.

There was a bit of a bungle in the way it was organised by the law enforcement agencies which could mean he may not go free, but some evidence might well be inadmissible in a US court of law.#

PS: That's just my understanding from the few articles I've read, I apologise in advance if I've misunderstood.

Why is it taking years for this lack of a trial to take place? Judge Judy would have knocked this one out in a half hour.

The fact that trials can take years is ridiculous. They should charge him, or not charge him with a crime, not waste time and money. If Kim really did something wrong, US authorities would not let this drag on.

It's not within the US's power to do that. At the end of the day NZ is an independant country with it's own governing laws that have to be followed.

"Miscarriage of justice"? So when's Kim going to go free? Or is the situation not that black and white?

It's unfortunately not because of the mess that the United States did. He's free in New Zealand and thus there are no problems there, but the bigger issue is the US and what they took, locked down, and are in possession of. For him winning in NZ, while important, was already done when the entire raid was declared illegal and this effectively means that the courts back him 100%. The real target is the US executive branch for the mess they made. Now Kim gets to fight on even ground. Considering that he was left with his money frozen and his business in shambles through illegal means trying to bully him, good.

On the one hand, Kim is one of the internet's biggest douchebags; an egomaniacal spoiled child.

This does not matter in the least.

The measure of the rights Kim Dotcom has, when many people online think he's a scummy, horrible person, is the measure of the rights you have. The only time you need your rights is when you're deeply unpopular with the government, and possibly the people. If you only have rights when you're popular, then you don't have them at all. The freedom to conform is not freedom.

If the US's case fails against him, this is a cause for rejoicing, not sorrow, at least for New Zealand citizens, because it means the rule of law there has not been corrupted by the media giants.

"Miscarriage of justice"? So when's Kim going to go free? Or is the situation not that black and white?

It's unfortunately not because of the mess that the United States did. He's free in New Zealand and thus there are no problems there, but the bigger issue is the US and what they took, locked down, and are in possession of. For him winning in NZ, while important, was already done when the entire raid was declared illegal and this effectively means that the courts back him 100%. The real target is the US executive branch for the mess they made. Now Kim gets to fight on even ground. Considering that he was left with his money frozen and his business in shambles through illegal means trying to bully him, good.

The main thing is that this is being treated as a criminal case. Were it a civil case, as it really should be, the raids would unlikely have taken place and he would be in one court or another. Obviously someone did not feel that they had a strong enough case if it were kept as a civil case.

Oh, does our beloved Global Police State not get its way all of the time? What a pity. I can hear those bulletheads gnashing their teeth in frustration. Didn't they raid Dotcom's home with helicopters and fascist jackboot costumes? About what? Did Dotcom illegally invade another country based on known-false intel? No, that was Bush43... who still walks the earth a free man.

The US is a clownlike corporate-fascist entity murdering and imprisoning everyone it encounters. With no repercussions. The US is completely out of control, using 9/11/01 as an excuse. Waaah. We'd better enforce our overreaching copyright laws to keep the RIAA and MPAA happy.

The US deserves all the embarrassment it's going to get over this case.

The entire saga has become one of the most expensive legal cases in New Zealand’s history.

And this is why it is good for law enforcement to have all of their ducks in a row. When you screw up apprehending someone with resources, expect them to drag it out the fight based on those screw ups.

Oh, does our beloved Global Police State not get its way all of the time? What a pity. I can hear those bulletheads gnashing their teeth in frustration. Didn't they raid Dotcom's home with helicopters and fascist jackboot costumes? About what? Did Dotcom illegally invade another country based on known-false intel? No, that was Bush43... who still walks the earth a free man.

The US is a clownlike corporate-fascist entity murdering and imprisoning everyone it encounters. With no repercussions. The US is completely out of control, using 9/11/01 as an excuse. Waaah. We'd better enforce our overreaching copyright laws to keep the RIAA and MPAA happy.

The US deserves all the embarrassment it's going to get over this case.

The difference between the good guys and the bad guys is the good guys by definition must play by the rules. If they don't they're not good guys. You're just left with a bunch of bad guys in different uniforms.

Props to New Zealand for admitting its mistakes and being the bastion of justice the US merely claims to be.

Someday I want to live in a country that acts on what is right, not what is in its interests. The two are often and regrettably found to be very different.

Oh, does our beloved Global Police State not get its way all of the time? What a pity. I can hear those bulletheads gnashing their teeth in frustration. Didn't they raid Dotcom's home with helicopters and fascist jackboot costumes? About what? Did Dotcom illegally invade another country based on known-false intel? No, that was Bush43... who still walks the earth a free man.

The US is a clownlike corporate-fascist entity murdering and imprisoning everyone it encounters. With no repercussions. The US is completely out of control, using 9/11/01 as an excuse. Waaah. We'd better enforce our overreaching copyright laws to keep the RIAA and MPAA happy.

The US deserves all the embarrassment it's going to get over this case.

As a US citizen, I really, really wish I could disagree with you.

It's easy. As a US citizen, the US has certainly encountered you, and yet neither murdered nor imprisoned you.

I agree with the general thrust of x76's post, but not with the overhysterical hyperbole.

The difference between the good guys and the bad guys is the good guys by definition must play by the rules. If they don't they're not good guys. You're just left with a bunch of bad guys in different uniforms.

Props to New Zealand for admitting its mistakes and being the bastion of justice the US merely claims to be.

Someday I want to live in a country that acts on what is right, not what is in its interests. The two are often and regrettably found to be very different.

All countries try to act in their perceived best interest. Sometimes that even means doing the right thing.

Oh, does our beloved Global Police State not get its way all of the time? What a pity. I can hear those bulletheads gnashing their teeth in frustration. Didn't they raid Dotcom's home with helicopters and fascist jackboot costumes? About what? Did Dotcom illegally invade another country based on known-false intel? No, that was Bush43... who still walks the earth a free man.

The US is a clownlike corporate-fascist entity murdering and imprisoning everyone it encounters. With no repercussions. The US is completely out of control, using 9/11/01 as an excuse. Waaah. We'd better enforce our overreaching copyright laws to keep the RIAA and MPAA happy.

The US deserves all the embarrassment it's going to get over this case.

As a US citizen, I really, really wish I could disagree with you.

It's easy. As a US citizen, the US has certainly encountered you, and yet neither murdered nor imprisoned you.

I agree with the general thrust of x76's post, but not with the overhysterical hyperbole.

"It's easy. As a US citizen, the US has certainly encountered you, and yet neither murdered nor imprisoned you."

I take my Ars username from a friend wrongfully murdered by a US cop under shady circumstances any civil society would find suspect. My brother was wrongfully arrested, detained for hours and beaten while in custody by US cops because one cop confused my brother's name with a known criminal and all they said was, "oops, free to go." I have been in Iraq and Afghanistan where I have seen my country break the Geneva Conventions on purpose, day in and day out, resulting in all manner of atrocity.

So please excuse me if I don't mind a little hyperbole whilst agreeing with a certain sentiment I know to be true.

"Miscarriage of justice"? So when's Kim going to go free? Or is the situation not that black and white?

It's unfortunately not because of the mess that the United States did. He's free in New Zealand and thus there are no problems there, but the bigger issue is the US and what they took, locked down, and are in possession of. For him winning in NZ, while important, was already done when the entire raid was declared illegal and this effectively means that the courts back him 100%. The real target is the US executive branch for the mess they made. Now Kim gets to fight on even ground. Considering that he was left with his money frozen and his business in shambles through illegal means trying to bully him, good.

The main thing is that this is being treated as a criminal case. Were it a civil case, as it really should be, the raids would unlikely have taken place and he would be in one court or another. Obviously someone did not feel that they had a strong enough case if it were kept as a civil case.

They also apparently missed the fact that its not much of a criminal case in the US either.

The US needs to stop over reaching and trying to enforce its laws in other countries.

Same way the current DOJ has unlawfully intercepted phone calls in a variety of newspapers across the country. Time to take your country back before it is too late.

The difference between the good guys and the bad guys is the good guys by definition must play by the rules. If they don't they're not good guys. You're just left with a bunch of bad guys in different uniforms.

Props to New Zealand for admitting its mistakes and being the bastion of justice the US merely claims to be.

Someday I want to live in a country that acts on what is right, not what is in its interests. The two are often and regrettably found to be very different.

All countries try to act in their perceived best interest. Sometimes that even means doing the right thing.

Sometimes, yes. But most of the time "the interests of <insert country here>" do not square with what is right.

I agree it's prudent for a country to act in its interests. What I have a problem with is said country's propaganda to its people that its doing the right thing when it is in face acting in its own interests and nothing more. I also have a problem with the majority of a country's citizenry being so apathetic that they don't rub a few brain cells together long enough to figure out they're being had.

The difference between the good guys and the bad guys is the good guys by definition must play by the rules. If they don't they're not good guys. You're just left with a bunch of bad guys in different uniforms.

Props to New Zealand for admitting its mistakes and being the bastion of justice the US merely claims to be.

Someday I want to live in a country that acts on what is right, not what is in its interests. The two are often and regrettably found to be very different.

All countries try to act in their perceived best interest. Sometimes that even means doing the right thing.

Sometimes, yes. But most of the time "the interests of <insert country here>" do not square with what is right.

I agree it's prudent for a country to act in its interests. What I have a problem with is said country's propaganda to its people that its doing the right thing when it is in face acting in its own interests and nothing more. I also have a problem with the majority of a country's citizenry being so apathetic that they don't rub a few brain cells together long enough to figure out they're being had.

The difference between the good guys and the bad guys is the good guys by definition must play by the rules. If they don't they're not good guys. You're just left with a bunch of bad guys in different uniforms.

Props to New Zealand for admitting its mistakes and being the bastion of justice the US merely claims to be.

Someday I want to live in a country that acts on what is right, not what is in its interests. The two are often and regrettably found to be very different.

All countries try to act in their perceived best interest. Sometimes that even means doing the right thing.

Sometimes, yes. But most of the time "the interests of <insert country here>" do not square with what is right.

I agree it's prudent for a country to act in its interests. What I have a problem with is said country's propaganda to its people that its doing the right thing when it is in face acting in its own interests and nothing more. I also have a problem with the majority of a country's citizenry being so apathetic that they don't rub a few brain cells together long enough to figure out they're being had.

And your solution is?

Ah, the old "shut up if you don't have a solution" logic. Classic.

The solution is obvious. Nations should practice what they preach and their citizenry should demand nothing less.

The main thing is that this is being treated as a criminal case. Were it a civil case, as it really should be, the raids would unlikely have taken place and he would be in one court or another. Obviously someone did not feel that they had a strong enough case if it were kept as a civil case.

isn't the burden of proof in a civil case much lower than in a criminal? so, wouldn't it be easier to try in civil court? i think the problem is the paid MPAA and RIAA agents in the US Gov't that got this process started we under orders to disrupt KDC's 'business' by any means necessary.

they never really expected to win any case. they've successfully stolen a year+ of his life and dismantled his operations. so far it's a runaway success as far as the media content shills are concerned.

the only cost to them was a heavy dose of American's national integrity and honor. seems legit.

"Miscarriage of justice"? So when's Kim going to go free? Or is the situation not that black and white?

It's unfortunately not because of the mess that the United States did. He's free in New Zealand and thus there are no problems there, but the bigger issue is the US and what they took, locked down, and are in possession of. For him winning in NZ, while important, was already done when the entire raid was declared illegal and this effectively means that the courts back him 100%. The real target is the US executive branch for the mess they made. Now Kim gets to fight on even ground. Considering that he was left with his money frozen and his business in shambles through illegal means trying to bully him, good.

The main thing is that this is being treated as a criminal case. Were it a civil case, as it really should be, the raids would unlikely have taken place and he would be in one court or another. Obviously someone did not feel that they had a strong enough case if it were kept as a civil case.

That doesn't make sense. The burden of proof in civil cases is much more lax than in criminal cases. The heavy handed approach to search and seizure was due to the government trying to get all the evidence they needed to have a solid criminal case. Rather moot since the raid in NZ was handeled so very poorly, and the US case now seems as if it's no more than a paper tiger.

I also have a problem with the majority of a country's citizenry being so apathetic that they don't rub a few brain cells together long enough to figure out they're being had.

↓ Moderation: (show post)

Unfortunately while you were in Iraq and Afghanistan, the majority of the country was sitting in a booth at their local Denny's/IHOP believing that war in the middle east was protecting their freedom to order another plate of bacon.

"Miscarriage of justice"? So when's Kim going to go free? Or is the situation not that black and white?

It's unfortunately not because of the mess that the United States did. He's free in New Zealand and thus there are no problems there, but the bigger issue is the US and what they took, locked down, and are in possession of. For him winning in NZ, while important, was already done when the entire raid was declared illegal and this effectively means that the courts back him 100%. The real target is the US executive branch for the mess they made. Now Kim gets to fight on even ground. Considering that he was left with his money frozen and his business in shambles through illegal means trying to bully him, good.

The main thing is that this is being treated as a criminal case. Were it a civil case, as it really should be, the raids would unlikely have taken place and he would be in one court or another. Obviously someone did not feel that they had a strong enough case if it were kept as a civil case.

I believe that civil charges are not extraditable. Each country has a treaty that outlines what crimes can be extraditable and it varies from country to country. IIRC, the money laundering charge had to be added to get the extradition.

The main thing is that this is being treated as a criminal case. Were it a civil case, as it really should be, the raids would unlikely have taken place and he would be in one court or another. Obviously someone did not feel that they had a strong enough case if it were kept as a civil case.

isn't the burden of proof in a civil case much lower than in a criminal? so, wouldn't it be easier to try in civil court? i think the problem is the paid MPAA and RIAA agents in the US Gov't that got this process started we under orders to disrupt KDC's 'business' by any means necessary.

they never really expected to win any case. they've successfully stolen a year+ of his life and dismantled his operations. so far it's a runaway success as far as the media content shills are concerned.

the only cost to them was a heavy dose of American's national integrity and honor. seems legit.

edited to fix quote

I believe extradition treaties are only valid for criminal complaints so the U.S. would have to show some sort of substance to a criminal charge before they can get him to the U.S for any kind of trial. This whole series of hearings has been over the evidence that would be used at the extradition hearing and whether or not Kim Dot Com's defense team can have access to that evidence to prepare for the hearing.